Conspiracy, HAARP, Earthquakes, Volcano's, Weather Modification, H1N1, Swine Flu, NWO, Politics, and other hedonistic topical articles from The CEO & Czar of The Committee In My Head. Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead.

Global Warming Debate; baby it’s cold outside

Global Warming my ass. 56 degrees this morning with another couple of inches of rain to go with the 14 inches we got last week here in FEMA Zone 5. What happened to summer and hot and humid days? How many years will I have to watch The God Father movie reruns inside on the 4th of July?

Have all those x marks the spot chemtrails in the sky finally caught up with us mere planetary inhabitants?

Region V is the second most populated of the 10 FEMA regions serving more than 49 million people. The region’s most common challenges are floods, tornadoes, blizzards, and earthquakes. It also has the highest volume of shipped hazardous materials of all 10 FEMA regions, and is home to 16 of the nation’s nuclear power plants which, reside in five of the six of Region V states. http://www.fema.gov/about/regions/regionv/index.shtm

It’s just cold and rainy and it sucks. To top it off, We the People are being held hostage to another piece of crap legislation, the House crap-and-trade energy bill.

I woke up on the right side of the bed today, and put my furnace on while the pool heater is on at the same time. The washing machine and dryer are running, the stove is on, and so are all my lamps because it is so dark from the overcast sky. Can’t wait to see how many carbon credits we spend and use today.

Released today. Four independent scientists respond in detail to the evidence that government scientists claim shows that carbon dioxide causes significant global warming. The real debate continues. After the return fire from the skeptical experts, there was not a single point left standing.

“Our conclusions are:

that whilst recent increases in greenhouse gases play a minor radiative role in global climate, no strong evidence exists that human carbon dioxide emissions are causing, or are likely to cause, dangerous global warming;

that it is unwise for government environmental policy to be set based upon monopoly advice, and especially so when what monopoly is represented by an international political (not scientific) agency; and

that the results of implementing emissions trading legislation will be so costly, troublingly regressive, socially divisive and environmentally ineffective that Parliament should defer consideration of the CPRS bill and institute a fully independent Royal Commission of enquiry into the evidence for and against a dangerous human influence on climate.

We add, with respect to point 3 that the scientific community is now so polarized on the controversial issue of dangerous global warming that proper due diligence on the matter can only be achieved where competent scientific witnesses are cross-examined under oath and under strict rules of evidence.

The AGW mistake: In 1984 Hansen et al published a paper that showed a method to calculate loop feedback from temperature using separate calculations of feedback factors for each phenomenon. Climate Scientists calculated feedbacks for phenomena that they knew about and added them together. The calculation resulted in a net positive feedback from temperature. With net positive feedback the climate models predict significant future global temperature rise. The method assumes that the calculations of feedback factors are correct and that all feedbacks have been accounted for. The assumption is wrong. This mistake has propagated through most of the Climate Science community.

Many Climate Scientists appear to understand some relevant science poorly (it’s not in their curriculum) and therefore do not recognize the significance of accepted paleo temperature data. With understanding of the missing science and knowledge of the data it is trivial to show that NET feedback on temperature can not be significantly positive. Thus Climate Scientists have not calculated feedback correctly and/or all feedbacks have not been accounted for. Without net positive feedback, added atmospheric carbon dioxide has no significant influence on average global temperature. See the pdfs linked from http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true for the evidence, to identify the missing science and to see the cause of the temperature run-up in the late 20th century.

There is still the certainty of peek oil given the finite resource. Research money would be far better spent to modify the dna of some algae that are high oil producers to make them more robust and/or other algae that are robust to make them higher oil producers. (There was Government sponsored research to identify high oil-producing algae in the 90s that was not exploited because of cheap oil at that time) Calculations based on that work show that an open facility (which could be located in the desert) 120 miles on a side using only sunlight, sea water and genetically engineered algae could produce enough oil to meet all liquid fuel needs in the U.S.A. Alternatively fast breeder reactors with established technology could meet all of humanities needs for energy for millions of years.